144 Search Results for "copenhagen"

• London eyes pole position with London eyes pole position with low carbon investment plan

  • From: yiehk21
  • Description:

    London (Platts)--7Sep2010/652 am EDT/1052 GMT

     

      
    
        UK climate change minister Greg Barker is set Tuesday to launch the
    Capital Markets Climate Initiative--a new forum which aims to dismantle
    barriers to clean investment in developing countries and make London the world
    leader in low carbon finance.
    
         The CMCI aims to help unlock the private sector's role in helping to
    provide $100 billion of new green investment required annually by 2020 to
    fight climate change in developing countries.
    
         Under the new initiative, the UK's Department of Energy and Climate
    Change is bringing together key City players with international financiers and
    policy makers. 
    
         "The vital role of capital markets in tackling climate change has been
    overlooked for far too long," Barker said in a DECC statement Tuesday.
    
         "The finance needed to help developing countries become low carbon isn't
    flowing at the rate and scale needed."
    
         He added: "However, this is a huge opportunity for the UK financial
    services industry to grab a share of a completely new international market
    that will be worth billions in the years to come.
    
         "We need to put the sub-prime disaster behind us and focus back on
    investment in genuine wealth creation in ways that don't damage the
    environment." 
    
         London's Mayor Boris Johnson wants the capital--already a major center
    for carbon trading--to cement its place at the cutting edge of global clean
    investment.
    
         Said Johnson: "That's why City Hall has teamed up with others to set up
    the GBP100 million ($154 million) London Green Fund to provide investment for
    climate change programs and to prove their commercial viability."
    
         "I want to ensure London's competitiveness as a leading global city and
    the Capital Markets Climate Initiative is a great opportunity to help us do
    that," he said.
    
         The London Green Fund is made up of contributions of GBP50 million from
    the London European Regional Development Fund Program, GBP32 million from the
    London Development Agency and GBP18 million from the London Waste and
    Recycling Board.
    
         The CMCI was set for launch Tuesday at the London Stock Exchange.
    
         LSE chief Xavier Rolet said the exchange was "already home to over 100
    clean tech firms, with our market's deep pool of equity capital powering the
    development of low carbon companies from around the world."
    
         He added: "But we want to do more, and by working together, building on
    the UK's leadership in green technology and harnessing the global expertise
    gathered here today, we can help build a vibrant business environment for the
    low carbon age."
    
         Several major economies agreed in Copenhagen in December 2009 to work
    toward delivering $100 billion/year of funding by 2020 to help developing
    countries cope with the physical effects of climate change. Many governments
    agree that most of this aid will have to come from the private sector.
    
         The International Energy Agency estimates that total investment of $1
    trillion/year will be needed by 2030 to reduce emissions by 50% by 2050.
    
         From 2005-09, investment in clean energy grew by 230%, with $162 billion
    invested globally last year.
     
    http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetailedNews/RSSFeed/HeadlineNews/ElectricPower/8923882/

  • Blog post
  • 2 days ago
  • Views: 116
  • Not yet rated

• The climate deniers of the lef The climate deniers of the left

  • From: yiehk21
  • Description:

     

    
    Coca Cola greenwash at the Copenhagen climate summit.

    The scientific community has never been more united in its conviction that climate change is well on the way to rendering planet Earth a vastly less hospitable place for most species, including our own. Yet doubt about the gravity of the problem is, paradoxically, on the rise.

    Recent polls in the US, Britain and Canada reveal that fewer people take the threat of climate change seriously than five years ago.

    One likely reason is the insidious effect of the ongoing campaign — largely orchestrated and funded by the fossil fuel industry, and drawing support from a cast of right-wing pundits and politicians — to sow doubt about the existence of climate change or at least about the contribution of human activity to it.

    The contrarians don’t all line up with the forces of reaction, however.

    Alexander Cockburn, veteran left journalist and co-editor of online journal Counterpunch.com, resigned this year from a more than 40-year stint on the editorial board of the New Left Review.

    His resignation was in response to the publication of Mike Davis’ “Who Will Build The Ark?”, a reflection on the implications of climate change, as the lead article of the illustrious journal’s 50th anniversary issue.

    There are few issues that get Cockburn as hot under the collar as global warming.

    He is by far the most extreme in his wholesale denial of the very problem of climate change, but Cockburn is not the only prominent leftist to dismiss the urgency accorded to global warming by progressives.

    York university’s David F. Noble, historian of science and technology, critic of the corporate usurpation of the university and occasional contributor to Canadian Dimension, is equally irate over the Left’s attention to climate change.

    And Slavoj Zizek, one of the world’s most prominent left-wing intellectuals, dubbed the “Elvis” of cultural theory, has at times articulated an agnostic position on global warming.

    Each of these thinkers, who reflect a real, if marginal, minority opinion on the left, come at their climate change scepticism from different angles.

    Cockburn maintains that global warming is a “non-existent threat” based on flawed science. He approvingly cites naysayers such as Patrick Michaels of the right-wing Cato Institute, fingered as a paid consultant of the fossil fuel industry.

    Against the prevailing scientific consensus, Cockburn insisted in an April 2007 Counterpunch.org article: “There is still zero empirical evidence that anthropogenic production of CO2 is making any measurable contribution to the world’s present warming trend.”

    In his view, climate change is a fiction fostered by capital as part of a strategy to profit from higher energy costs at the expense of the poor — a notion bearing more than a passing resemblance to the type of conspiracy-thinking he elsewhere denounces.

    He treats the left with contempt for not only being hoodwinked by the global warming “dogma”, but for being naive in seeing it as a tipping point in the direction of radical social change.

    Noble’s emphasis is different, although he pursues the general theme of climate change as a false crisis fabricated by elites for their own purposes.

    Tracing the history of the corporate world’s warming to the issue of climate change, he depicts it as a deliberate and successful effort by a faction of the ruling class to co-opt and derail the anti-globalisation movement of the 1990s.

    He is especially contemptuous of the left for adopting what he sees as an uncritical view of science in relation to climate change, one that disconnects science from politics, and of buying into the dominant either/or logic.

    Noble argues corporate interests have succeeded in creating a false polarisation of positions that leaves no space to reject both sides: he complains that one can either accept climate change as the principal problem of our time, along with the green capitalist solutions, or join the much maligned “deniers”.

    Zizek, too, cautions against a naive view of science. However, he seems lately to be conceding more to the scientific consensus than in previous pronouncements, where he opposed any limits to development on the grounds of uncertainty about the science.

    He argued that nature is inherently unstable and crisis-ridden and that ideas about any natural balance being upset by human activity are misguided.

    He said ecology, insofar as it emphasises our finitude and calls for us to treat the Earth with respect, is inherently conservative and expresses a deep distrust of change, development and progress. He thus characterised it as “a new opium of the masses”.

    In an April 29 New Statesmen article, Zizek seemed to shift gears. On the one hand, he repeated the assertion that nature is chaotic and there is no underlying natural balance to be perturbed by human activity. Science, he reiterated, is unreliable and its conclusions are subject to the pressures of capital.

    But he asserted that our survival as a species depends on “a series of stable natural parameters that we tend to take for granted ... The limits to our freedom become palpable with ecological disturbances, as our ability to transform nature destabilises the basic geological conditions of life on earth.”

    He appeared to jettison his opposition to placing limits on development when he wrote: “What is demanded, first, is strict egalitarian justice: worldwide norms of per capita energy consumption should be imposed, stopping developed nations from poisoning the environment at the present rate while blaming developing countries, from Brazil to China, for ruining our shared environment.”

    Of course, both scepticism and the ability to change one’s mind are signs of intellectual vigour. And dissent, as US socialist Norman Thomas said, is “essential to the search for truth in a world wherein no authority is infallible”.

    But there is a question of what motivates these dissenters.

    Scepticism about climate change on the right is fuelled, particularly in the US, by the belief that global warming is a socialist Trojan horse, designed to destroy the free market by the stealth of environmental regulation.

    What seems to unite the climate change sceptics on the left is the opposite belief — that climate change is distracting and deflecting the left from the project of radical social transformation.

    It is reminiscent of the response of a significant part of the socialist left to the emerging environmental consciousness in the 1970s, which discounted concerns about pollution and the rate of resource consumption as a “petit bourgeois” affair with no bearing on the world’s masses.

    But as countless scientists have stressed, the most devastating effects of climate change will be felt first of all by the poor in the global South, who are more directly and immediately dependent on the natural world for their living.

    The sceptics are legitimately concerned that the ecological crisis will be manipulated by capital as a business opportunity.

    There is no doubt that climate change will be exploited for profit by the corporate elite — just as the oil catastrophe in the Gulf is being turned to economic advantage by some of the companies responsible for the disaster who are now cashing in on the clean-up activities — but this fact should not lead us to discount the reality or gravity of the crisis.

    What is called for is an anti-capitalist response to the ecological threat — not only to the survival of our own species but to the innumerable other species now at risk.

    Left climate change sceptics seem to ignore the emerging ecosocialist current, which has taken up the challenge of wedding the critique of capitalism to an analysis of the ecological crisis.

    As one pamphlet produced the time of the December 2009 Copenhagen climate summit pointed out: “Climate change is not just an environmental issue. It is but one symptom of a system ravaging our planet and destroying our communities.”

    Far from being distracted by climate change, ecosocialists understand it as intimately related to the reigning global system of production that endlessly reproduces the unjust disparities of wealth and power that have always been the object of the left’s opposition.

    How can Cockburn, Noble and Zizek argue with that?

    http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/45269

     

  • Blog post
  • 4 days ago
  • Views: 77
  • Not yet rated

• Bjørn Lomborg: $100bn a year n Bjørn Lomborg: $100bn a year needed to fight climate change

  • From: ashleysoon
  • Description:

    Exclusive 'Skeptical Environmentalist' and critic of climate scientists to declare global warming a chief concern facing world

    Danish professor Bjorn Lomborg. Photograph: Adrian Dennis/AFP/Getty Images

    The world's most high-profile climate change sceptic is to declare that global warming is "undoubtedly one of the chief concerns facing the world today" and "a challenge humanity must confront", in an apparent U-turn that will give a huge boost to the embattled environmental lobby.

    Bjørn Lomborg, the self-styled "sceptical environmentalist" once compared to Adolf Hitler by the UN's climate chief, is famous for attacking climate scientists, campaigners, the media and others for exaggerating the rate of global warming and its effects on humans, and the costly waste of policies to stop the problem.

    But in a new book to be published next month, Lomborg will call for tens of billions of dollars a year to be invested in tackling climate change. "Investing $100bn annually would mean that we could essentially resolve the climate change problem by the end of this century," the book concludes.

    Examining eight methods to reduce or stop global warming, Lomborg and his fellow economists recommend pouring money into researching and developing clean energy sources such as wind, wave, solar and nuclear power, and more work on climate engineering ideas such as "cloud whitening" to reflect the sun's heat back into the outer atmosphere.

    In a Guardian interview, he said he would finance investment through a tax on carbon emissions that would also raise $50bn to mitigate the effect of climate change, for example by building better sea defences, and $100bn for global healthcare.

    His declaration about the importance of action on climate change comes at a crucial point in the debate, with international efforts to agree a global deal on emissions stalled amid a resurgence in scepticism caused by rows over the reliability of the scientific evidence for global warming.

    The fallout from those rows continued yesterday when Rajendra Pachauri, head of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, came under new pressure to step down after an independent review of the panel's work called for tighter term limits for its senior executives and greater transparency in its workings. The IPCC has come under fire in recent months following revelations of inaccuracies in the last assessment of global warming, provided to governments in 2007 – for which it won the Nobel peace prize with former the US vice-president Al Gore. The mistakes, including a claim that the Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035, prompted a review of the IPCC's processes and procedures by the InterAcademy Council (IAC), an organisation of world science bodies.

    The IAC said the IPCC needed to be as transparent as possible in how it worked, how it selected people to participate in assessments and its choice of scientific information to assess.

    Although Pachauri once compared Lomborg to Hitler, he has now given an unlikely endorsement to the new book, Smart Solutions to Climate Change. In a quote for the launch, Pachauri said: "This book provides not only a reservoir of information on the reality of human-induced climate change, but raises vital questions and examines viable options on what can be done."

    Lomborg denies he has performed a volte face, pointing out that even in his first book he accepted the existence of man-made global warming. "The point I've always been making is it's not the end of the world," he told the Guardian. "That's why we should be measuring up to what everybody else says, which is we should be spending our money well."

    But he said the crucial turning point in his argument was the Copenhagen Consensus project, in which a group of economists were asked to consider how best to spend $50bn. The first results, in 2004, put global warming near the bottom of the list, arguing instead for policies such as fighting malaria and HIV/Aids. But a repeat analysis in 2008 included new ideas for reducing the temperature rise, some of which emerged about halfway up the ranking. Lomborg said he then decided to consider a much wider variety of policies to reduce global warming, "so it wouldn't end up at the bottom".

    The difference was made by examining not just the dominant international policy to cut carbon emissions, but also seven other "solutions" including more investment in technology, climate engineering, and planting more trees and reducing soot and methane, also significant contributors to climate change, said Lomborg.

    "If the world is going to spend hundreds of millions to treat climate, where could you get the most bang for your buck?" was the question posed, he added.After the analyses, five economists were asked to rank the 15 possible policies which emerged. Current policies to cut carbon emissions through taxes - of which Lomborg has long been critical - were ranked largely at the bottom of four of the lists. At the top were more direct public investment in research and development rather than spending money on low carbon energy now, and climate engineering.

    Lomborg acknowledged trust was a problem when committing to long term R&D, but said politicians were already reneging on promises to cut emissions, and spending on R&D would be easier to monitor. Although many believe private companies are better at R&D than governments, Lomborg said low carbon energy was a special case comparable to massive public investment in computers from the 1950s, which later precpitated the commercial IT revolution.

    Lomborg also admitted climate engineering could cause "really bad stuff" to happen, but argued if it could be a cheap and quick way to reduce the worst impacts of climate change and thus there was an "obligation to at least look at it".

    He added: "This is not about 'we have all got to live with less, wear hair-shirts and cut our carbon emissions'. It's about technologies, about realising there's a vast array of solutions."

    In a quote for the book launch, Pachauri - who once likened the author to Adolf Hitler - said: "This book provides not only a reservoir of information on the reality of human induced climate change, but raises vital questions and examines viable options on what can be done."Despite his change of tack, however, Lomborg is likely to continue to have trenchant critics. Writing for today's Guardian, Howard Friel, author of the book The Lomborg Deception, said: "If Lomborg were really looking for smart solutions, he would push for an end to perpetual and brutal war, which diverts scarce resources from nearly everything that Lomborg legitimately says needs more money."

    By: Juliette Jowit | August 30, 2010

    Original Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/aug/30/bjorn-lomborg-climate-change-u-turn/print

  • Blog post
  • 1 week ago
  • Views: 154
  • Not yet rated

• Copenhagen Wheel Makes Your Bi Copenhagen Wheel Makes Your Bike Electric, Talks to Your iPhone

  • From: ashleysoon
  • Description:

    For more details: http://greenopolis.com/goblog/jerryjamesstone/copenhagen-wheel-makes-your-bike-electric-talks-your-iphone

  • 3 weeks ago
  • Views: 19
  • Not yet rated

• Copenhagen Wheel Makes Your Bi Copenhagen Wheel Makes Your Bike Electric, Talks to Your iPhone

  • From: ashleysoon
  • Description:

    For more details: http://greenopolis.com/goblog/jerryjamesstone/copenhagen-wheel-makes-your-bike-electric-talks-your-iphone

  • 3 weeks ago
  • Views: 15
  • Not yet rated

• Copenhagen Wheel Makes Your Bi Copenhagen Wheel Makes Your Bike Electric, Talks to Your iPhone

  • From: ashleysoon
  • Description:

    For more details: http://greenopolis.com/goblog/jerryjamesstone/copenhagen-wheel-makes-your-bike-electric-talks-your-iphone

  • 3 weeks ago
  • Views: 11
  • Not yet rated

• Copenhagen Wheel Makes Your Bi Copenhagen Wheel Makes Your Bike Electric, Talks to Your iPhone

  • From: ashleysoon
  • Description:

    For more details: http://greenopolis.com/goblog/jerryjamesstone/copenhagen-wheel-makes-your-bike-electric-talks-your-iphone

  • 3 weeks ago
  • Views: 11
  • Not yet rated

• Copenhagen Wheel Makes Your Bi Copenhagen Wheel Makes Your Bike Electric, Talks to Your iPhone

  • From: ashleysoon
  • Description:

    For more details: http://greenopolis.com/goblog/jerryjamesstone/copenhagen-wheel-makes-your-bike-electric-talks-your-iphone

  • 3 weeks ago
  • Views: 11
  • Not yet rated

• Tesla Electric Roadster v2.5: Tesla Electric Roadster v2.5: The iPhone 4 of Electric Cars

  • From: yiehk21
  • Description:

    
    Photo: Tesla Motors

    Sadly, It Still Costs an Arm and a Leg
    Hot on the heels of its quarter-billion dollars IPO, Tesla Motors is opening two new stores in Copenhagen, Denmark, and Newport Beach, California, and unveiling a refreshed version of its all-electric Roadster (version 2.5, for those keeping track). What has changed? Read on for more details and photos.

    
    Photo: Tesla Motors

    Incremental Improvements
    If you're expecting major changes, you'll have to wait for the Model S electric sedan to come out, or for whatever is going to be replacing the Roadster after its production run ends in 2012. But like the iPhone 4, the new Roadster is more of the same, but with incremental improvements. Tesla has fixed some of the complaints that have been voiced by Roadster owners, not too much to for with such an expensive vehicle

    
    Photo: Tesla Motors

    Cosmetic Changes to the Tesla Roadster
    The first thing you'll notice are the exterior changes. There's a new front fascia with diffusing vents and a rear diffuser. They match the design language of the Model S more closely than before, though it's not quite identical (the Tesla badge isn't located on the same spot on the new Roadster and the Model S).

    Tesla now also offers "directional forged wheels available in both silver and black".

    
    Photo: Tesla Motors

    Changes Inside the Tesla Roadster
    The interior has been improved too. New seats with improved comfort, larger more supportive bolsters and a new lumbar support system replace the old seats. There's also an optional 7" touchscreen display and a back-up camera.

    The power control hardware has also been tweaked to handle "exceptionally hot climates", and a few tweaks to sound insulation should make the cabin even quieter than before.

    
    Photo: Tesla Motors

    Via Tesla Motors

    Source : http://www.treehugger.com/

  • Blog post
  • 1 month ago
  • Views: 158
  • Not yet rated

• Global wind power and other re Global wind power and other renewables about to surpass fossil fuels

  • From: yiehk21
  • Description:

    Wind energy additions reached a record high of 38 GW last year, adding the emissions-free generating technology now exists in more than 82 nations.

    

     Wind power got another strong vote of confidence last week when the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the Renewable Energy Policy Network (REN21) jointly issued reports saying supplies of new green electricity capacity should overtake fossil fuels later this year or in 2011.
    
    The reports noted that in 2009, for the second year in a row, both Europe and the US added more power capacity from renewable sources such as wind farm and solar power than conventional sources like coal, gas and nuclear. According to a press release, renewables accounted for 60% of newly installed capacity in Europe and more than 50% in the US.
    
    “Globally, nearly 80 GW of renewable power capacity was added in 2009, including 31 GW of hydro and 48 GW of non-hydro capacity. This combined renewables figure is now closing in on the 83GW of fossil-fuel, thermal capacity installed in the same year,” the press release said.
    
    “If the trend continues, then 2010 or 2011 could be the first year that new capacity added in low carbon power exceeds that in fossil-fuel stations.”
    
    The press release said wind was even more dominant as a destination for investment in 2009 than 2008.
    
    “In 2008, it accounted for $59 billion or 45 [%] of all financial investment in sustainable energy; in 2009, it accounted for $67 billion and its share rose to 56 [%].”
    
    Wind power additions reached a record high of 38 GW last year, the release noted, adding the emissions-free generating technology now exists in more than 82 nations.
    
    UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner said 2009 was a year of resilience, frustration and determination for sustainable energy investment.
    
    “Resilience to the financial downturn that was hitting all sectors of the global economy and frustration that, while the UN climate convention meeting in Copenhagen was not the big breakdown that might have occurred, neither was it the big breakthrough so many had hoped for,” the release quoted Steiner saying. “Yet there was determination on the part of many industry actors and governments, especially in rapidly developing economies, to transform the financial and economic crisis into an opportunity for greener growth.”
    
    Mohamed El-Ashry, Chair of REN21, was quoted saying favorable policies in more than 100 nations played a critical role in the recent strength of global renewable energy investments recently. “For the upward trend of renewable energy growth to continue, policy efforts now need to be taken to the next level and encourage a massive scale up of renewable technologies.” El-Ashry said.
    
    Do you think we’re about to reach a global green energy tipping point, where wind and other renewables will soon supply more new electricity than fossil fuels?
    
    
    By Chris Rose, blog.ewea.org/
    
    
    
    TAGS: wind energy, wind power
    Source : http://www.evwind.es/
    
  • Blog post
  • 2 months ago
  • Views: 91
  • Not yet rated

• UN 'won't deliver' on climate UN 'won't deliver' on climate change

  • From: yiehk21
  • Description:

     

    

    THE urgent need to act on climate change means the world's major economies cannot wait for a global agreement to be struck through the UN and should now consider other options, prominent economist and Reserve Bank board member Warwick McKibbin says.

    In a paper released by the Lowy Institute yesterday, Professor McKibbin says in the wake of last year's failed Copenhagen summit the world's biggest emitting countries should agree to adopt similar carbon prices that rise over time.

    An emissions trading scheme, carbon tax or direct regulation - which would create a shadow carbon price - could be used at the national level to establish the ''standardised'' carbon price.

    delayedAds.push(function(){ FD.addExternalReferralsAd($merge(FD.baseAd, { id: "adspot-300x250-pos-3", iframeId: "adspot-300x250-pos-3-iframe", params: $merge($merge(FD.baseAd.params, { pos: 3, aamsz : "300x250" }),getAdParams("300x250")) ,addSmall: true ,smallText: "Advertisement: Story continues below" }) ); } );

    The Lowy paper, written with former Australian climate change negotiator Greg Picker and lawyer Fergus Green, recommends the Major Economies Forum, not the UN, be the body to negotiate a carbon price agreement because its 17 member countries are responsible for 80 per cent of the world's carbon emissions.

    The agreement could be then be included in any global climate change deal negotiated later through the UN.

    Observers fear UN negotiations have stalled after the last year's tumultuous Copenhagen summit where countries bickered over targets and verification.

    The Copenhagen summit also failed to adopt a hastily drawn up agreement known as the Copenhagen Accord.

    It is also unlikely the 193 member countries of the UN's climate change framework convention, any one of which can veto a deal, will adopt a comprehensive agreement at its next major meeting in Mexico this November.

    ''The sheer urgency of weaning the world off carbon means we also sorely need a framework for international climate policy that provokes immediate, progressive responses from governments, businesses and citizens, while fostering the trust and cooperation among countries that will be essential for a sufficient and fair long-term mitigation effort,'' the Lowy report says.

    ''This framework must be built from the bottom up - outside, but in parallel with, the ongoing UN process.''

    Much of the Lowy paper's proposal is similar to climate change policies devised and advocated by Professor McKibbin for a number of years.

    But he yesterday told The Age that he had been approached by Dr Picker and Mr Green to work up a new report which considered the political and institutional issues of how to implement them.

    A spokeswoman for Climate Change Minister Penny Wong yesterday rejected the Lowy paper's proposal, instead reiterating Australia's commitment to the Copenhagen Accord. ''Our efforts are best focused on implementing the pledges already made through the Copenhagen Accord, rather than spending valuable time re-negotiating the whole global framework for tackling climate change,'' she said.

    Firms targeted over emissions

    A WORLD-FIRST shareholder activist fund that will target Australia's 200 largest companies to reduce their carbon emissions will be launched today. The Climate Advocacy Fund, managed by Australian Ethical Investment, will buy shares in the companies so it can move shareholder motions and ask questions at annual meetings to increase corporate efforts to lessen business impacts on climate change. It was hoped to raise $100 million for the fund in the first year.

    Source : http://www.theage.com.au

  • Blog post
  • 2 months ago
  • Views: 100
  • Not yet rated

• 'Climategate' inquiry mostly v 'Climategate' inquiry mostly vindicates scientists

  • From: yiehk21
  • Description:

     

     

    

    AP – Chairman of the review group, Sir Muir Russell talks to the media on their findings at the Royal Institution …

    LONDON – An independent report into the leak of hundreds of e-mails from one of the world's leading climate research centers on Wednesday largely vindicated the scientists involved, saying they acted honestly and that their research was reliable.

    But the panel of inquiry, led by former U.K. civil servant Muir Russell, did chide scientists at the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit for failing to share their data with critics.

    "We find that their rigor and honesty as scientists are not in doubt," Russell said. "But we do find that there has been a consistent pattern of failing to display the proper degree of openness."

    Russell's inquiry is the third major U.K. investigation into the theft and dissemination of more than 1,000 e-mails taken from a back-up server at the university.

    They caused a sensation when they were published online in November. The stolen correspondence captured researchers speaking in scathing terms about their critics, discussing ways to stonewall skeptics of man-made climate change, and talking about how to freeze opponents out of peer-reviewed journals.

    Beyond specific allegations of scientific misconduct, the furor over the e-mails fed the notion that, at worse, a closed community of climate scientists was systematically exaggerating the threat of climate change, or at least giving skeptics' arguments the collective cold shoulder.

    The scandal destabilized the U.N. climate change conference at Copenhagen and led to the temporary resignation of Climatic Research Unit director Phil Jones, who stepped down as Russell was brought in to investigate.

    The carefully worded report mostly defended the scientists from attacks, saying there was no evidence Jones had destroyed evidence that he knew critics were seeking, or that he or others perverted the peer review process.

    It also largely excused the intemperate language that helped make the e-mails such an Internet sensation, saying that the more extreme exchanges — such as when one scientist cheers the death of a skeptic and another jokingly threatened to beat a prominent critic — were typical of often over-the-top electronic missives friends and colleagues trade every day.

    But the report did dole out some criticism, saying that Jones clearly pushed others to delete e-mails that he thought might provide ammunition to skeptics, and that the University of East Anglia had been "unhelpful" in dealing with Freedom of Information Act requests — an issue Britain's data-protection watchdog has also flagged.

    Importantly, the report also revisited the now infamous e-mail exchange between Jones and a colleague in which the climatologist refers to a "trick" used to "hide the decline" in a chart used to track global temperatures.

    The chart, which shows an alarming temperature spike at the end of the last millennium, became a powerful visual tool in the campaign to control greenhouse gas emissions, gracing the front cover of the World Meteorological Organization's 1999 report on climate change. Russell said the chart was misleading because it wasn't explicit enough about the way in which the underlying data had been spliced together.

    Jones' critics were only partially mollified. Canadian economics professor Ross McKitrick welcomed the conclusion that the 1999 chart was misleading. But he still said that the inquiry seemed "unduly concerned to downplay the problems they found" and offer excuses for the researchers involved.

    University of East Anglia Vice-Chancellor Edward Acton claimed that the report had "completely exonerated" Jones, who is returning to the Climatic Research Unit as director of research.

    But Benny Feiser, who runs the skeptic-leaning Global Warming Policy Foundation, said there was strong evidence that legitimate requests for information had been repeatedly stifled.

    "I don't think the university can just claim that this is a vindication," he said. He promised his own inquiry into the matter, to publish its report in August.

    There have already been two major British reports on the e-mail leak and its aftermath. A British parliamentary inquiry largely backed the scientists involved, while another independent investigation, which like Russell's report was commissioned by the University of East Anglia, gave a clean bill of health to the science itself.

    A flood of other investigations have also dealt with various aspects of the issue over the past nine months. Two U.S. university reviews of Penn State University professor Michael Mann — a prominent player in the controversy — have cleared him of wrongdoing. Other organizations, such as the Union of Concerned Scientists, have also conducted their own investigations.

    An AP review of the e-mails, published in December, said they didn't support claims that the science of global warming was being faked.

    Source : http://news.yahoo.com/

  • Blog post
  • 2 months ago
  • Views: 53
  • Not yet rated

• Harvesting cyclists' kinetic e Harvesting cyclists' kinetic energy

  • From: whitefeather
  • Description:

    : ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION, GREEN ALTERNATIVES

    
    

    NEW WHEELS: Cyclists can harvest energy from coasting downhill and use it to help pedal uphill. (Photo: Max Tomasinelli)

    How many more people would bike to work if they weren't afraid of the uphill climbs along their commute? Thanks to researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, we are about to find out. The New York Times reports the Senseable City Laboratory is working on a wheel to gather the kinetic energy we generate while biking, saving it up for when we need a boost on those daunting hills.
    
    
    According to the article, the researchers envision the new wheel as part of "Biking 2.0," putting cycling in the same category as hybrid cars. The cycle stores up the energy released for braking or coasting downhill, and communicates that via smartphones. The spinning wheel will charge a battery in the hub, called the Copenhagen Wheel (named after the city where it was unveiled this week). The new part can be retrofitted into any existing rear wheel. It differs from other electronic bikes because it eliminates heavy batteries or wires since all of the mechanisms are contained within the wheel hub. In addition to the energy-harvesting technology, the new hub includes "sensors that track air quality, a meter that logs miles and a GPS unit to track routes." This information can all be sent via Bluetooth to the cyclist's cell phone.

     

    According to developers, the rider need to place his phone on the bike handlebars and the Copenhagen Wheel Application communicates information to the phone regarding how much effort the rider exerts, when to change gears, how much motor assistance is needed, or even whether the bike should be locked or unlocked.

     

    The Danes seem hopeful that the new wheel can fit in well with their culture that is "trying to wean itself off cars," but others are skeptical that cyclists will accept the new technology. In an era of fixed-gear or single-speed bikes, simplicity seems to reign supreme. Perhaps dedicated cyclists will indeed spurn the new hub. But this might not be the target market for the hub anyway. As M.I.T. researchers continue to develop this biking technology, they stress their first goal is to create "a bike that's a true transportation tool." They point out that people with short commutes who would otherwise be wary of sweat or hills might be encouraged to hop on a bike. The Times quotes lead researcher Christine Outram as saying, "[this hub]'s a technology that can get more people on bikes."
    
    
  • Blog post
  • 3 months ago
  • Views: 231
  • Not yet rated

• Canada owns the podium for ina Canada owns the podium for inaction at Bonn climate talks

  • From: yiehk21
  • Description:

    With international climate treaty negotiations underway again in Bonn, Germany this week, a fossil-of-the-day award has been handed to Canada by the International Climate Action Network (CAN) - a worldwide network of over 450 Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs).

    The fossil-of-the-day is given out each day of negotiations as a means of calling out the countries who have been particular bad actors at the negotiating table. As of last count, Canada has more fossils than any other country in the world.

    In fact, last year Canada was named the "Fossil of the Year" and awarded a "Colossal Fossil."

    As Ben Wikler from Avaaz explained at the Colossal Fossil award ceremony last year in Copenhagen, "Canada has made zero progress here on financing, offering nothing for the short term or the long term beyond vague platitudes. And in last night's high-level segment, Canada's environment minister gave a speech so lame that it didn't include a single target, number or reference to the science."

    Things haven't changed much since then as Canada adds another Fossil to its trophy case at the Bonn climate talks today after they announced that they would lower their greenhouse gas emission targets to the same level as the United States.

    So now we don't only see these talks in Bonn continuing to drag along at a snail's pace, but Canada, one of the largest per-capita greenhouse gas emitters in the world, is now trying to wrangle out of the commitments they have already made.

    Earlier this year, Canada hosted the 2010 Games in Vancouver and told the world they were the most sustainable Olympics in history. They also won a record number of medals at the Games.

    There is a bitter irony, that only a few months later the same country is leading the pack to the bottom when it comes to dealing with climate change and racking up a record number of awards for doing so.

    Source : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

  • Blog post
  • 3 months ago
  • Views: 60
  • Not yet rated

• Philips Wants Your Ideas for L Philips Wants Your Ideas for Livable Cities

  • From: ashleysoon
  • Description:
    

    Bike and bus lanes make Copenhagen more livable. Photo via Spacing Magazine.

    Philips, the multinational electronics company, recently announced its Livable Cities Award, “looking for individuals, community or non-governmental organizations and businesses who have ideas – ideas for ‘simple solutions’ that will improve people’s health and well-being in a city.”

    The contest is split into three categories:

    1. Well-being Outdoors – Initiatives that will help citizens feel safe in public spaces, as well as initiatives that help create identity and a sense of belonging.
    2. Independent Living – Initiatives that will help the growing number of elderly people living alone to feel secure and comfortable in a city and/or enable longer living at home with appropriate access to healthcare.
    3. Healthy Lifestyle at Work and Home – Initiatives that will support a healthy body and mind, whether through a person’s surroundings or via other essentials such as exercise, sleep and diet.

    The three award grants total €125,000.

    The contest will be open until October 2010, and winners will be announced in April 2011.

    Sustainable mobility is key to the “livable cities” concept, so if you have an idea, enter the contest!

    OTHER INITIATIVES

    The London-based international consulting company Mercer releases its “Quality-of-Living” rankings annually, including 39 factors across 10 categories, like recreation, housing and public services and transportation. This year, Vienna, Austria came out on top for best quality of life. Mercer also released a list of the top “eco-cities,” with Calgary, Canada ranking highest, based on water availability, water potability, waste removal, sewage, air pollution and traffic congestion.

    Submitted by Victoria Broadus on June 3, 2010

    Original Source: thecityfix.com

  • Blog post
  • 3 months ago
  • Views: 294
  • Not yet rated

• EU pledges 8.5m euros for Bang EU pledges 8.5m euros for Bangladesh to fight climate change

  • From: yiehk21
  • Description:

    The two-day Asia Regional Conference of Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA) ended here on Monday adopting a joint declaration to help least developed countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing Countries (SIDS) in Asia to cope with the climate change.
    
    Bangladesh, Cambodia and the Maldives signed the joint declaration at a city hotel. Under the agreement, the European Union (EU) will provide 13.5 million euros of which Bangladesh will get 8.5 million euros and the remaining amount would be shared by the two other countries.
    
    State Minister for Environment and Forests Dr Hasan Mahmud and European Commissioner for Climate Action of the EU Connie Hedegaard, Ambassador and Head of the EU Delegation to Bangladesh Dr Stefan Frowein and Minister for Maldives Aslam Mohammad, among others, were present at the signing.
    
    After the signing, State Minister for Environment and Forests Dr Hasan Mahmud, at a press conference, termed the regional climate conference as a successful one and recalled Bangladesh's successes in the recent Copenhagen conference.
    
    "Today's joint declaration will create a platform for Bangladesh to work with regard to the climate change more efficiently. Our main objective is to have a legally binding agreement in the upcoming Cancun climate conference," said Mahmud.
    
    Connie Hedegaard said, "We need to work very hard to achieve success in the forthcoming climate conference. South Asian countries which suffer most due to the climate change should be the top of the agenda in the conference. Developing countries need to remind the developed countries how much they are suffering from the adverse impact of climate change," she said.
    
    The conference has set a new example of working together to handle the problems due to the climate change in a coordinated manner, said Dr Stefan Frowein.
    
    A number of issues relating to climate change are being discussed in the two-day conference including Copenhagen to Mexico: Next Steps on International Climate Negotiations, Modalities of Implementation of the GCCA: Presentations and Discussion and Impact of Climate Change on development:
    
    Adaptation Challenges.
    
    The GCCA was formed at the initiative of the European Union (EU) in 2007 to bring the developing countries particularly the most vulnerable ones to climate change, in a platform to adapt to climate change and pursue sustainable development strategies.
    
    By focusing on the LDCs and small island states, the alliance offers a structured dialogue and concrete cooperation on actions funded by the EU's development policy.

    Source : http://nation.ittefaq.com/
    

  • Blog post
  • 3 months ago
  • Views: 64
  • Not yet rated

• Synthetic Trees Set To Combat Synthetic Trees Set To Combat Climate Change

  • From: whitefeather
  • Description:

    

    While creating a bunch of plastic trees may not sound like a great way to protect the environment that is the proposal being put forward by a Columbia University professor who is working with the U.S. Energy Secretary. The fake trees provide more than just an aesthetic though and like their real counterparts they absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The difference is that these synthetic trees are 1,000 times faster at collecting CO2 than real trees. Plastic leaves trap the CO2 and compress it, storing it internally in the trunk as a liquid.

    The cost is still unknown but it is likely to pretty high and they estimate it to be around the price of a car. The trees could be stored anywhere and moved around as needed and with carbon emissions constantly rising the need to combat this trend is immense and desperate according to many. Each tree would apparently be capable of pulling in a ton of CO2 every day.

    Original Source: www.devicepedia.com/news/synthetic-trees-set-to-combat-climate-change.html

  • Blog post
  • 4 months ago
  • Views: 292
  • Not yet rated

• Living Map of Europe Grows on Living Map of Europe Grows on Copenhagen Wall

  • From: ashleysoon
  • Description:

    
    The outside of the European Environment Agency office in Copenhagen. Photo via EEA.

    A display of vertical greenery in the shape of the European continent has been added to the outside wall of the European Environment Agency's centrally located headquarters in Copenhagen to provide an example of the ways in which cities can be redesigned to enhance green spaces and biodiversity.

    "Cities, as the home to many species, are ecosystems in their own right. They consume, transform and release material and energy. They develop, adapt and interact with other ecosystems. Unlike other ecosystems, however, cities are our primary habitat: three out of four Europeans live in urban areas," the agency wrote in announcing the project.

    'Europe in Bloom'
    The living façade, dubbed "Europe in bloom," was unveiled May 22 for World Biodiversity Day by the EEA, which works to coordinate European environmental monitoring efforts and integrate environmental considerations into EU and member countries' policies.

    In addition to offering areas for recreation and benefits to mental and physical health, urban green spaces "filter large amounts of water after heavy rainfall and soften the effects of heat waves or other extreme events," according to the agency, whose recent assessment on urban ecosystems concluded that "with the right policies and tools, urbanization does not need to be a threat to biodiversity in cities and beyond."

    5,000 Plants From 20 Species
    The vertical garden, the first in Denmark, serves to insulate the building, absorbing urban noise and reduce dust, thereby improving air quality, while also offering potential habitat to birds and insects.

    Such small patches of green can still be helpful for migratory birds, according to an unrelated study published last week in the journal Landscape Ecology. Researchers Stephen Matthews and Paul Rodewald from Ohio State University found that "even a small urban forest can help migrating birds... [which] used the patches of greenery to rest and refuel in the middle of their journey between winter and breeding sites," the BBC reported Friday.

    The EEA's living map is made up of 5,000 plants from 20 different plant species, including purple verbena, dark green sedum and delicate sutera, all growing inside felt pockets attached to a custom-made support structure and watered by an automated system that drains to the bottom of the wall. "All annual plants, the species were chosen for their colors," the agency wrote. "Combined together, they will form a map of Europe showing the different densities of biodiversity."

    By: Jennifer Hattam | May 23, 2010

    Original Source: treehugger.com

  • Blog post
  • 4 months ago
  • Views: 170
  • Not yet rated

• Bill Gates chucks cash at clim Bill Gates chucks cash at climate cooling cloud creator

  • From: whitefeather
  • Description:

    Bill Gates chucks cash at climate cooling cloud creator

    $7bn nautical chill pills

    By Rik Myslewski in San Francisco • Get more from this author

    Posted in Environment, 11th May 2010 06:02 GMT

    Free whitepaper – Taking control of your data demons: Dealing with unstructured content

    Boffins want to curb climate change by building a $7bn fleet of 1,900 ships to crisscross the oceans as each sucks up ten tons of seawater per second and blasts it a kilometer into the sky to create clouds to absorb sunlight and cool the earth.

    And Bill Gates is funding them. No, really.

    The Times Online reports that a San Francisco research group with the cloudy name of Silver Lining has received $300,000 from the billionaire mosquito terrorist and tiny-nuke pusher to fund research into the aforementioned geoengineering project.

    

    Sailing over a school of sardines is not recommended (source: Inhabitat)

    The Times notes that the US and UK scientists involved in the project witnessed the wimpiness of climate change–fighting agreements (or lack of same) coming out of last year's Copenhagen conference, and decided that it'd be global seppuku to wait for international action.

    So they're going it alone: Ships + pumps = gushers. Gushers + clouds = cover. Cover = cooling.

    Well, actually not merely clouds, but clouds that have been made more reflective due to the insertion of squillions of microscopic water droplets, says principal researcher Armand Neukermanns. According to his analysis, this geoengineering idea is "the most benign" because its effects could be easily reversed, unlike other ideas such as, say, salting the upper atmosphere with reflective sulfate particles.

    The first test of this theory will involve ten ships scuttling around 3,800mi² of ocean. According to the Times, however, to get the whole scheme up and contributing effectively to ratcheting down the earth's fever, the fleet would need to be 1,900-ships strong.

    Neukermanns didn't mention whether the ships would be diesel-powered. ®

    Original Source: www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/11/silver_lining/

  • Blog post
  • 4 months ago
  • Views: 163
  • Not yet rated

• How China and India Sabotaged How China and India Sabotaged the UN Climate Summit

  • From: whitefeather
  • Description:

    By Tobias Rapp, Christian Schwägerl and Gerald Traufetter

    

    What really went on at the UN climate conference in Copenhagen? Secret recordings obtained by SPIEGEL reveal how China and India prevented an agreement on tackling climate change at the crucial meeting. The powerless Europeans were forced to look on as the agreement failed.

    At some point his patience was at an end, as depleted as the oxygen in the small conference room. He could no longer keep still, not even for a second.

    <!-- if (navigator.userAgent.indexOf('iPhone') == -1) { document.writeln('<div class="spMInline">'); document.writeln('<scr'+'ipt type="text\/javascript">'); document.writeln('<!--'); document.writeln("OAS_RICH('Middle2');"); document.writeln('\/\/ -'+'->'); document.writeln('<\/scr'+'ipt>'); document.writeln('<\/div>'); } // -->

    <!-- OAS_RICH('Middle2'); // -->

    The words suddenly burst out of French President Nicolas Sarkozy: "I say this with all due respect and in all friendship." Everyone in the room, which included two dozen heads of state, knew that he meant precisely the opposite of what he was saying. "With all due respect to China," the French president continued, speaking in French.

    The West, Sarkozy said, had pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent. "And in return, China, which will soon be the biggest economic power in the world, says to the world: Commitments apply to you, but not to us."

    Sarkozy, gaining momentum, then said: "This is utterly unacceptable!" And then the French president stoked the diplomatic conflict even further when he said: "This is about the essentials, and one has to react to this hypocrisy!"

    A hush came over the room. Even the mobile phones stopped ringing. It was Friday, Dec. 18, 2009, at about 4 p.m. That was the moment when the world leaders meeting in Copenhagen abandoned their efforts to save the world.

    The Summit within the Summit

    The world's most powerful politicians were gathered in the "Arne Jacobsen" conference room in Copenhagen's Bella Center, negotiating ways to protect the world's climate. US President Barack Obama was perched on the edge of a wooden chair with blue upholstery, talking to German Chancellor Angela Merkel and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. The blue turban of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was bobbing over the tops of a few hastily assembled potted plants. The meeting was soon dubbed the "mini-summit of the 25."

    Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi was there, representing the African continent, and Mexican President Felipe Calderon was standing nearby. Only one important world leader was missing, an absence that came to symbolize the failure of the climate summit: Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao.

    Instead, Obama was sitting across from China's deputy foreign minister, He Yafei. It was a diplomatic affront that would be mentioned during the course of the meeting.

    Even three months after the noteworthy events at the climate summit in Copenhagen, the Chinese leader still seemed to feel a need to publicly justify his absence in the room at the time. And those who were present are still not entirely clear as to what was actually agreed during the negotiations.

    Since the Copenhagen showdown, international climate politics have faltered like a mortally wounded animal -- something that can also be observed at the meeting taking place this week at the Petersberg conference center outside Bonn, Germany.

    Reconstructing the Decisive Meeting

    The public was kept almost completely in the dark about the hectic crisis meeting that took place behind closed doors in Copenhagen and dragged on for 10 hours. The Chinese are said to have openly warned their Danish hosts against indiscretions.

    Now, for the first time, SPIEGEL is in a position to reconstruct the decisive hour-and-a-half meeting on that fateful Friday. Audio recordings of historical significance, in the form of two sound files that total 1.2 gigabytes in size and that were created by accident, serve as the basis for the analysis. The Copenhagen protocol shows how the meeting Gordon Brown called "the most important conference since the Second World War" ended in a diplomatic zero. As if viewed through a magnifying glass, the contours of a new political world order become visible, one shaped by the new self-confidence of the Asians and the powerlessness of the West.

    "What are we waiting for?" Chancellor Merkel says in English, hoping to bring the faltering negotiations back on track. Meanwhile, more than 100 other world leaders, people who apparently had no say in the matter, were getting bored in the plenary chamber next door. They apparently believed, erroneously, as it turned out, that the 25-member mini-summit would produce some sort of document.

    In fact, an oppressive mood had already spread through the halls of the congress center. The motley collection of environmental activists had been locked out of the conference by then, leaving only their abandoned booths standing in the no man's land of the world's supposed saviors.

    'Any Objections'

    Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen opened the meeting in the Arne Jacobsen room. Even though he was the host, Rasmussen lacked experience in the rules of engagement on the international stage, and he seemed a little disoriented in the maze of international climate politics. He said that a draft agreement had been worked out which reflected the concerns of the participating countries. "I think we have to now ask if there is some major objections," he said quietly in his not-quite-perfect English.

    <!-- if (navigator.userAgent.indexOf('iPhone') == -1) { document.writeln('<div class="spMInline">'); document.writeln('<scr'+'ipt type="text\/javascript">'); document.writeln('<!--'); document.writeln("OAS_RICH('Middle3');"); document.writeln('\/\/ -'+'->'); document.writeln('<\/scr'+'ipt>'); document.writeln('<\/div>'); } // -->

    <!-- OAS_RICH('Middle3'); // -->

    With little assurance left in his voice, he turned over the microphone to one of his legal advisers, who rattled off the corrections of mistakes that had crept into the hastily written draft agreement.

    When has it ever been the case at an international conference that world leaders had to concern themselves with such minor details? "I don't think anything like this has ever happened, and I'm not sure whether something like this will ever happen again," says UN chief negotiator Yvo de Boer.

    Environment ministers and bureaucrats had presented their bosses with a 200-page bundle of documents, because they had been unable to agree on emissions levels, reduction measures and control measures. When the heads of state and government arrived on Thursday, they were shocked by the chaos their subordinates had left for them after 10 days of negotiations.

    Part 2: 'We Need Some More Time'

     

    On Thursday evening, Denmark's Queen Margrethe hosted a gala dinner for world leaders at the parliament building. On the sidelines of the event, the Chinese leader heard a rumor that the US government had scheduled an important round of negotiations without inviting him personally. Wen Jiabao was offended and withdrew to his hotel room, where, to the irritation of the other leaders, he remained for much of the remainder of the conference.

    Instead, he sent his negotiator He Yafei to the nightly meeting of world leaders. Together, they asked the Danish host to reduce the maze of documents to a few, key pages. They still contained bold statements, such as the goal of a 50-percent reduction in global CO2 emissions by 2050 (compared with a 1990 benchmark). That kind of a commitment would have required that the United States, China and India also agree to cut their greenhouse gas emissions in half. At that point, Achim Steiner of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) was still rejoicing over the potential agreement, saying: "This isn't a train wreck. It really has teeth!"

    With a success of this magnitude, the European leaders, especially Angela Merkel, would have been able to return home for the Christmas holidays with their heads held high.

    Playing for Time

    But now, on Friday afternoon, the Chinese negotiator looked at the document from the previous evening and said: "Mr. President, given the importance of the paper, we do not want to be rushed… We need some more time." Yafei is one of his country's top diplomats, a cosmopolitan man with frameless glasses who has a better command of the English language than many of the world leaders who were sitting at the same negotiating table.

    He Yafei was playing for time and constantly requesting interruptions, because he needed to confer with his prime minister, Wen Jiabao. Merkel upped the pressure, saying: "So we just have to go."

    There were still two important placeholders, X and Y, in the draft agreement. They marked the spots where the percentage targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, for the industrialized nations and emerging countries respectively, were to be entered. "We cannot go over and say nice things but x and y wait please one year or so," Merkel said. The German chancellor was determined to secure a commitment from China and India to participate in the climate protection efforts.

    But China and India were unwilling to make that commitment. Behind the backs of the Europeans, they had apparently reached their own agreement with Brazil and South Africa. "We have all along been saying 'Don't prejudge options!,'" said a representative of the Indian delegation*, prompting Merkel to burst out: "Then you don't want legally binding!"

    This, in turn, prompted the Indian negotiator to say angrily: "Why do you prejudge options? All along you have said don't prejudge options and now you are prejudging options. This is not fair!" Chinese negotiator He Yafei stood by this remark.

    Breach of Process

    British Prime Minister Brown, speaking in a sonorous voice, tried to mediate. "I think it's important to recognize what we are trying to do here," he said. "We are trying to cut emissions by 2020 and by 2050. That is the only way we can justify being here. It is the only way we can justify the public money that is being spent to do so. It is the only way we can justify the search for a treaty."

    Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg pointed out that it was the Indians who had proposed the inclusion of concrete emissions reductions for the industrialized nations in the treaty.

    But India had made an about-face within hours and was no longer interested in his own proposal. An unidentified member of the group was outraged, saying: "I am surprised that our Indian friend would say that an amendment by the Indian environmental minister this morning is no longer there. This is a breach of process."

    Merkel took one last stab. The reduction of greenhouse gases by 50 percent, that is, limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius, was a reference to what is written in the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report. Then she directed a dramatic appeal at the countries seeking to block the treaty: "Let us suppose 100 percent reduction, that is, no CO2 in the developed countries anymore. Even then, with the (target of) two degrees, you have to reduce carbon emissions in the developing countries. That is the truth."

    Refusing to Give In

    Of course, Chinese negotiator He Yafei knew perfectly well that Merkel was right, which was precisely why he could not possibly agree with her proposal. It would have meant that China was required to check its economic development. Double-digit growth figures would no longer be an option for the Asian giant.

    The Chinese diplomat refused to give in to the Europeans' demands, saying: "Thank you for all these suggestions. We have said very clearly that we must not accept the 50 percent reductions. We cannot accept it."

    This was the point where Sarkozy, who had had enough, accused the Chinese of hypocrisy. As one of the attendees recalls: "There was a sense that we had reached a logjam, an abyss."

    Finally, the politician spoke up whose claim to being the most powerful man in the world would soon be based solely on his many nuclear weapons: US President Barack Obama. By that point, hardly anyone in the room dared to even bite into the soggy mozzarella sandwiches that were constantly being served.

    Part 3: Obama Stabs the Europeans in the Back

     

    Like the Europeans, the US president was also intent on securing a commitment to protect the climate from the new economic superpowers, China and India. "I think it is important to note that there are important equities that have to be considered," he said, with a distinctive note in his voice that suggested the foresight of a statesman.

    Obama reminded his fellow leaders that the industrialized nations are also dependent on the will of their citizens to contribute to saving the climate. "From the perspective of the developed countries, in order for us to be able to mobilize the political will within each of our countries to not only engage in substantial mitigation efforts ourselves, which are very difficult, but to also then channel some of the resources from our countries into developing countries, is a very heavy lift," Obama said. Then, speaking directly to China, he added: "If there is no sense of mutuality in this process, it is going to be difficult for us to ever move forward in a significant way."

    Finally, Obama addressed the diplomatic snub the Chinese prime minister had delivered with his absence: "I am very respectful of the Chinese representative here but I also know there is a premier here who is making a series of political decisions. I know he is giving you instructions at this stage."

    But then Obama stabbed the Europeans in the back, saying that it would be best to shelve the concrete reduction targets for the time being. "We will try to give some opportunities for its resolution outside of this multilateral setting ... And I am saying that, confident that, I think China still is as desirous of an agreement, as we are."

    'Other Business to Attend To'

    At the end of his little speech, which lasted 3 minutes and 42 seconds, Obama even downplayed the importance of the climate conference, saying "Nicolas, we are not staying until tomorrow. I'm just letting you know. Because all of us obviously have extraordinarily important other business to attend to."

    Some in the room felt queasy. Exactly which side was Obama on? He couldn't score any domestic political points with the climate issue. The general consensus was that he was unwilling to make any legally binding commitments, because they would be used against him in the US Congress. Was he merely interested in leaving Copenhagen looking like an assertive statesman?

    It was now clear that Obama and the Chinese were in fact in the same boat, and that the Europeans were about to drown.

    The Chinese negotiator confidently rejected Obama's criticism, saying: "I am speaking not on behalf of myself, but on behalf of China." Then he took on the French president's gaffe, and said: "I heard President Sarkozy talk about hypocrisy. I think I'm trying to avoid such words myself. I am trying to go into the arguments and debate about historical responsibility."

    History Lesson

    He Yafei decided to give the group a lesson in history: "People tend to forget where it is from. In the past 200 years of industrialization developed countries contributed more than 80 percent of emissions. Whoever created this problem is responsible for the catastrophe we are facing."

    What a humiliation it was for Chancellor Merkel. Photos were taken later on that showed her wearing a pink silk blazer, but with her face looking gray and exhausted. She attempted to show the world a dignified façade, speaking of a "new world climate order" that had been reached in Copenhagen. But speaking privately after the meeting, it was clear that she was furious about its failure. She swore to herself that she would not risk the same kind of humiliation again. The chancellor was deeply disturbed by the Chinese and Indian show of power, as well as by Obama's maneuvering.

    She must have felt very lonely in that room, with its mustard-colored walls. And the Chinese game wasn't over yet. "I have a procedural question," He Yafei said. "I kindly ask for a suspension of a few minutes for consultation. We need some time of consultation." What he meant was that he wanted to make a phone call to his prime minister.

    "How long?" Merkel asked.

    The chairman, Rasmussen, made the decision. "We meet again (at) half past four. Forty minutes."

    Decisions Made Elsewhere

    But the meeting did not reconvene. The key decisions were made elsewhere -- without the Europeans. The Indians had reserved a room one floor down, where Prime Minister Singh met with his counterparts, Brazilian President Lula da Silva and South Africa President Jacob Zuma. Wen Jiabao was also there.

    Shortly before 7 p.m., US President Obama burst into the cozy little meeting of rising economic powers.

    At that meeting, everything that was important to the Europeans was removed from the draft agreement, particularly the concrete emissions reduction targets. Later on, the Europeans -- like the other diplomats from all the other powerless countries, who had been left to wait in the plenary chamber -- had no choice but to rubberstamp the meager result.

    'Too Complicated'

    There is one politician who thought a great deal about his experiences in the Arne Jacobsen room in December 2009: Mexican Environment Minister Juan Elvira Quesada. His country will host the next major climate summit this November.

    In Copenhagen, Quesada learned that the existing procedure is ineffective. "When more than 190 countries are supposed to reach a consensus, it's simply too complicated," he says.

    At the November meeting in Cancun, he says, he would prefer not to even touch the document that was painstakingly drafted in that small group of world leaders. "If we were to simply move forward with the Copenhagen paper, it would be a disaster."

    *Eds Note: In the print edition of DER SPIEGEL, the comments from the Indian negotiator were attributed to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Merkel's Chancellery attributes this and following comments to a low ranking Indian negotiator.

     

    Original Source: www.spiegel.de/international/world/0%2C1518%2C692861%2C00.html

  • Blog post
  • 4 months ago
  • Views: 196
  • Not yet rated